Now on ScienceBlogs: An Experiment in Teaching Writing: A Look Inside the Sausage Factory

ScienceBlogs Book Club: Inside the Outbreaks

Search

Profile

profilepic9-09a.jpg

My scientific specialty is chronobiology (circadian rhythms and photoperiodism), with additional interests in comparative physiology, animal behavior and evolution. I am not an MD so I cannot diagnose and treat your sleep problems. As well as writing this blog, I am also the Online Discussion Expert for PLoS. This is a personal blog and opinions within it in no way reflect the policies of PLoS. You can contact me at: Coturnix@gmail.com


Buy the 2009 Science Blogging Anthology:

The Open Laboratory

Buy the 2008 Science Blogging Anthology:

The Open Laboratory

Buy the 2007 Science Blogging Anthology:

The Open Laboratory

Buy the 2006 Science Blogging Anthology:

The Open Laboratory

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Archives

Blogroll

Research Blogging Awards 2010


Find me on...


Homepage

FriendFeed

Twitter

Facebook

Nature Network

YouTube

Flickr

Dopplr

Stumbleupon

LinkedIn

Make Me Happy

Add this blog to my Technorati Favorites!

Add Scienceblogs to your Technorati Favorites!

Make Me Solvent

A Blog Around The Clock swag store

I Support

Quail Ridge Books

Carrboro Coworking

Project Exploration

Project Exploration

Bloggie Stuff

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported License.

« ClockQuotes | Main | My picks from ScienceDaily »

Ecological succession: scientific theories succeeding each other?

Category: Ecology
Posted on: April 14, 2008 5:08 AM, by Coturnix

Since I am not an ecologist, when I teach the ecology lecture I 'go by the book' and trust that the textbook will be reasonably accurate. But now, perhaps I should rethink the way I teach about ecological succession...What do my ecological readers think?

Share on Facebook
Share on StumbleUpon
Share on Facebook
Find more posts in: Life ScienceEnvironment

TrackBacks

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://scienceblogs.com/mt/pings/69485

Comments

1

Well, this has sort of thing has really been known for decades. Indeed in the early 20th century, Clements was competing with Gleason, who argued for a more random view of things. The Gleasonian view has been in vogue for years now.

Posted by: SteveF | April 14, 2008 7:30 AM

2

I agree with Steve. Also, most ecologists recognize stochastic processes like recruitment in thinking about succession. I'm biased towards the marine world, but I think you might find salt marsh and rocky intertidal succession useful examples for class. There's a lot of discussion on how different forces, such as competition, facilitation, and physical stress, interact to influence successional patterns. This book is a good reference.

Posted by: Miriam | April 14, 2008 1:50 PM

ScienceBlogs

Search ScienceBlogs:

Go to:

Advertisement
Follow ScienceBlogs on Twitter

© 2006-2011 ScienceBlogs LLC. ScienceBlogs is a registered trademark of ScienceBlogs LLC. All rights reserved.